So I just have to ask how many bills did the Democrats in the Senate propose and pass in comparison to the amount of solutions the Republicans in the House suggested?
So I just have to ask how many bills did the Democrats in the Senate propose and pass in comparison to the amount of solutions the Republicans in the House suggested?
This is what's happening right now. Has been happening for at least a year.
Why did they have coverage? Because it was cheap. They're not dropping coverage, their employer is dropping it for them. They're not picking it up because the fine is not big enough to force them to buy coverage.
So I've heard the theory several times (mostly from liberals) that the bill is shit and unworkable on purpose, to force a fix later, namely a shift to single payer. How do you feel about that theory?
Link about your claim on exemptions
As for Congress, they aren't exempt. The problem was with their staff. Their staff under the old system was provided insurance through payroll deductions where the government paid for much of the cost. Just like an employer pays much of the cost. The ACA switched the staffers to the exchanges but didn't offer to compensate them for losing their health coverage and having to pay out of pocket. Essentially they lost the benefit of their employer paying for a portion of their health care. Any normal person would see losing benefits as a pay cut. What was done was to allow staffers to put what the normal benefits contribution was towards their exchange costs. In essence, the government is still paying the same amount for benefits, its just paying them through the exchange.
The exemptions for the labor unions were requested, and denied, because the labor unions want to have both employer contributions if they like what the company offers, or to be able to buy insurance on the exchanges with a subsidy. Currently the ACA only provides a subsidy if your employer doesn't offer insurance up to certain standards. Labor unions get much better insurance than the minimum standards, but they pay more for it. For some of the union members it would benefit them to be able to skip what their employer offers because it may be cheaper for them to buy it from the exchanges the ACA setup. In other words, they wanted the ability to buy insurance that the ACA provided. So the exemption is the opposite of why you think they wanted it.
Nice sensationalism though. Btw, I'll have insurance for the first time in over a dozen years January 1st. I had the means, but not the ability to purchase it because my job didn't provide it and I've been denied for pre-existing conditions(taking a specific anti-biotic as a teenager). The system was terribly broken and costs were(and maybe still are) spiraling out of control. The ACA likely isn't done yet. I predict things like the congressional staffer exemption will go nationwide to help small businesses provide some support for employees getting coverage. I also think that what the labor unions want will eventually take place because it makes more economic sense for both employees and employers to let the employee choose the cheaper option.
I'd love to see the same. If true, I think it's high time I throw a fit.
It's what Obama was trying for from the start, and should have been what he got. Instead, he got this fucking unworkable mess. I don't blame him for the result, Congress had to compromise and get what they could get. I only blame him for taking that result (a pile of shit) and slapping some frosting on it and pretending it's a fucking birthday cake.
Last edited by KingHorse; 2013-10-02 at 02:39 AM.
Shutting down is an awfully strong way of saying "government workers get no pay for about a month"
The people I put the heaviest blame on are the moderate Democrats that basically thought, "I'm sitting on gold, and I'm not giving that motherfucker up without a prize". The delays on something that would have had to been done in a tight window, the insane and incoherent negotiations (fuck you, Bart Stupak), and so on basically obviated any chance for something other than a little incremental move.
You are suggesting that they will accrue the cost of hiring new employees? Will they hire additional HR and management to cover these employees? If you are not stressing people to produce more, you are replacing them with additional risk and cost if employees.
People who the articles you linked claimed would not be able to sign up to exchanges, because of their state impeding them. The young and healthy people you claim will choose to not use exchanges. People who choose to pay the fine instead of use the provided exchanges.
The attempts to repeal were something republicans thought would work?
That option is not available, due to the party that also wants to make Obamacare unavailable. Obamacare isn't the best solution, not even close, it's simply that or the crap we have now, where there is no speculation about it's failure.
Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi
No, it actually began in the summer of 2009. Nearly a year before Obamacare passed...
Because it was cheap? 0 is still cheaper. Why did they choose to spend money, instead of being cheaper and not spending it? It being cheap makes no sense, when the alternative was 0.
I don't buy into conspiracy theories.
Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi
I'm curious what types of jobs you think are cutting hours from 30+ to less than 30. I can't imagine any good paying jobs are shifting that way. If you make $20k a year at 25 years old(12.80/hr @30 hours) then you'd pay $5/mo for health care. The penalty for that person would be $200/year. Why would anyone not pay $5/mo and get health care versus $200/yr for nothing. Most of the jobs that are talking about shifting are low wage hourly jobs. I'd imagine they aren't even in the $12.80/hr range.
www.coveredca.com
Also, the insurance offered by many of those jobs isn't worth the paper its written on. They really didn't have coverage for their $80/mo plan with its $10k year maximum benefit. One trip to the ER could easily wipe out the insurance they had. The insurance offered under the ACA, at least in CA, all have no more than $6500 out of pocket/year, with no maximum benefit. You get cancer with that old insurance you're screwed. You get cancer with an ACA plan, you have to pay off what is about a used car loan, but hey, you get cancer treatment.
In a company of any real size, the cost is negligible. The proof is in the pudding: businesses are doing this, right now, and have been for a year or so. Businesses tend to do whatever is in their own best interest. They do what makes money. They don't do things for spite (at least not en masse). They're dropping full time people and replacing them, filling in HR as needed, and saving money. It's already happening. Has been for a while now. Are you denying that it's happening?
The people who choose not to participate are far outweighed by the people who don't participate through no choice of their own (employer no longer provides for them).
Who the fuck knows? It was an attempt, and a chance for the Senate to discuss it. I don't think they did, at all.
It's better for some, worse for some. It's a wash at the start, a disaster down the road, at least that's what it looks like it will be.
the most beautiful post I have ever read.. thank you Dr-1337 http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post22624432
Congress is exempt, because they are not having their employers drop their coverage (unlike normal employee's who have employers). I was stating that even Big Union (who have supported obama for a long time) read the ACA and saw what would happen.. and begged to get off it.
Also, The ACA is the largest "ya get what you pay for" service. I have been perusing the healthcare website, it is staggering to see difference in cost/benefits. Even better.. you can't see your options until you are fully registered. Which jacks up the "enrollment" numbers. My wife had to apply just to see what was on the website. Nothing they had compared to what I could get in the private sector (factoring in my specific family needs).
ACA is one step closer to a single payer system.. which will fail. Don't believe me? Read this:
you don't think there will be death panels either? Remember Kathleen Sebellius and the young girl with end stage Cystic Fibrosis? Doctors said she was a prime candidate, childrens lungs are among the rarest organs donated, and she had very little time to live. Left to Sebellius.. the young girl would have died.. Even though there was an adult lung available for her.Problem 7: The countries that have had single-payer systems for decades are slowly moving towards more private systems.
Canada, the United Kingdom, and even Sweden are slowly moving away from public systems of health care and allowing the private sector to take over. In each of these countries, particularly Canada, their single-payer systems have been disasters. Five-year cancer survival rates are higher in the U.S. than those in Canada. Americans have greater access to preventive screening tests and have higher treatment rates for chronic illnesses. Only half of emergency room patients are treated in a timely manner. The physician shortage is so severe that some towns hold lotteries, where the winners gain access to a local doctor.
The most vivid indictment of Canada’s system might be the fact that Canada's provincial governments rely on American medicine. Between 2006 and 2008, Ontario sent more than 160 patients to New York and Michigan for emergency neurosurgery. If Canada's single-payer system is preferable to our own, why would they send us their patients? (Hint: Because our system is better.)
These problems are likely only the beginning of what would happen to our health care if the Democrats have their way. I believe a majority of the country already understands the dangers of this health care bill. Details, however, are very important, and opponents of this bill must emphasize (to their Congressmen and fellow voters) the fatal drawbacks inherent in a single-payer system.
But, it started before Obamacare, while because of Obamacare, these people have access to exchanges they wouldn't have otherwise. They were doing this before Obamacare passed and are still doing it before the mandate. There is nothing to say that this has anything to do with Obamacare, other than providing these people with insurance exchanges.
Unlike yesterday, they do have an option of getting insurance through exchanges.
Doing something 40 times and expecting a different result is called insanity.
Do you think the current system is any good? This is what you think is a superior alternative?
Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi